Weak Cognitive Functions - Don't we all use most functions, at least a little bit?

[redcheerio]

OK, so cognitive function theory ranks the order in which each personality type develops each of the 8 cognitive functions.

I can only remember my first 4. As an ENTP, mine are: Ne, Ti, Fe, Si.

I can agree definitely with the first 2, maybe the first 3. However, despite not being an expert, I'm going to go out on a limb and call bullshit on the theoretical development order for the rest of the functions.

Examples

For example, aren't most of us forced to develop Te in order to function in an office environment? I'm pretty sure my Te is more developed than my Si because of this. I get Te Exhaustion sometimes, but other times, I actually like using my Te. For example, I like finding efficient ways to do things. I find anal-retentive measures for supposed minor improvements to be really annoying (like bosses that get mad if you're 10 min late), but I love finding aggressive ways to improve efficiency, like systemic improvements that reduce potential for error and reduce iterations. I also like to put a lot of time into the first iteration, in order to reduce the need for subsequent iterations. It seems to work well because I sometimes feel like I'm taking way too long, yet overall I seem to work a lot more efficiently than most, with fewer iterations.

Also, I feel like I have a lot more Se than my INTJ husband. Theoretically, INTJs are supposed to have more Se than ENTPs, and I'm going to call complete bullshit on that, too. From what I've seen, ENTPs seem to have waaaaay more Se than INTJs.

I also find I've made a few major decisions in my life that seem very Fi in nature, while it is very clear to me that my Ti is like second-nature, so while I definitely prefer Ti over Fi, I do think I use Fi sometimes.

I can go on and on about why I think the theory for the development of cog functions beyond the first 2 or 3 is BS, but I'd be interested in your thoughts.

Functions - "Use" or "Prefer"? What's the Difference?

Oh yeah, and another related topic for discussion. In another thread awhile ago, I mentioned "using" certain functions, and someone said you don't "use" functions, you "prefer" them. I don't understand that, it doesn't make sense to me.

What do the rest of you think?

 

[CuriousFeeling]

The short answer to your question: Yes, we use all functions. Our preference is what functions we tend to use the most often, or favor. It's like which tool you're going to use the most often to solve a problem or approach things in life.

Even as an INFJ with inferior Se, I still use Se to some degree, and I am observant of things in the environment that involve a pattern of behavior or a general trend. Usually said observations are tied into a theoretical concept though. Likewise, in some situations, I may make decisions based off of Fi and Te, rather than Fe and Ti. Even though my general social interactions with others may seem more Ni-Fe-Ti oriented, other things such as organizing a closet and grading papers are more of a Te based process. Fi tends to manifest itself more often when I am making a decision that best suits my own inner value system, such as deciding to wear the clothes I want and listening to the music I want, and also when I go through an independent streak when someone tells me to do something that I feel goes against what I believe is the right thing to do.

So basically, in a nutshell, we use functions we have weak preference for on a day to day basis. Our type is determined by which functions we have a preference for, or use the most often.

Hopefully this answers your question.

 

[redcheerio]

[MENTION=8888]CuriousFeeling[/MENTION], so you agree that beyond the first 2 or 3 functions, we don't develop them in the theoretical order associated with our type?

(I'll be out this afternoon, but will research and explain further what I meant later if it helps.)

 

[CuriousFeeling]

[MENTION=8888]CuriousFeeling[/MENTION], so you agree that beyond the first 2 or 3 functions, we don't develop them in the theoretical order associated with our type?

(I'll be out this afternoon, but will research and explain further what I meant later if it helps.)

If you're implying our fourth and other consecutive strongest functions, then yes it doesn't necessarily develop in theoretical order associated with our type. The fourth function you notice in theoretical functional preferences is actually the inferior or weakest developed function. For instance with me as an INFJ with a theoretical Ni>Fe>Ti>Se functional order preference, the Se is the weakest/last developed function. The other cognitive functions in between Ti and Se may vary from time to time. These are the shadow processes. Shadow functions can vary on strength based on the situation at hand. They usually come out the most often when a type is under stress and the tertiary isn't being effective to manage stress.

Does this clarify things?

 

[INTP]

Yep, we all use all 4 functions, not 8, thats a misconception from jungs work. jung said that everyone uses all functions, but he didnt see Ti and Te as two different functions, but just T function that can be oriented introverted(abstracting) or extraverted(emphatizing). so if you think Ti and Te as different functions, then no we dont use all 8 functions.

Anyways when it comes to developing functions, its not that we dont use undeveloped functions, its just that we use undeveloped functions unconsciously and we dont have conscious control over them. jung called this development of functions differentation:

also the confusion of 8 function comes partly from unconscious function linking itself to function with different orientation. for example undifferentiated Fe might feel like Fi if its linked to Ti or Si, thats simply because you dont become aware of the F extraverting and only feel the Fe through introverted functions.

 

[rav3n]

My opinion but where a function resides, doesn't necessarily equate to strong or weak. More how skillfully you wield the function, as it manifests in our behaviour or lack of.

 

[redcheerio]

If you're implying our fourth and other consecutive strongest functions, then yes it doesn't necessarily develop in theoretical order associated with our type. The fourth function you notice in theoretical functional preferences is actually the inferior or weakest developed function. For instance with me as an INFJ with a theoretical Ni>Fe>Ti>Se functional order preference, the Se is the weakest/last developed function. The other cognitive functions in between Ti and Se may vary from time to time. These are the shadow processes. Shadow functions can vary on strength based on the situation at hand. They usually come out the most often when a type is under stress and the tertiary isn't being effective to manage stress.

Does this clarify things?

Somewhat, thanks! So you're saying that all 5 remaining functions (after your top 3) are shadow functions?

Or are you saying something more like what INTP wrote below?

Yep, we all use all 4 functions, not 8, thats a misconception from jungs work. jung said that everyone uses all functions, but he didnt see Ti and Te as two different functions, but just T function that can be oriented introverted(abstracting) or extraverted(emphatizing). so if you think Ti and Te as different functions, then no we dont use all 8 functions.

Anyways when it comes to developing functions, its not that we dont use undeveloped functions, its just that we use undeveloped functions unconsciously and we dont have conscious control over them. jung called this development of functions differentation:

also the confusion of 8 function comes partly from unconscious function linking itself to function with different orientation. for example undifferentiated Fe might feel like Fi if its linked to Ti or Si, thats simply because you dont become aware of the F extraverting and only feel the Fe through introverted functions.

OK, so are you saying that as an ENTP I use Ne, Ti, Fe, and Si consciously? And I use Ni, Te, Fi, and Se subconsciously and linked to one of my first four functions?

Is there any particular logic to which of my differentiated functions the undifferentiated ones would normally be linked to?

My opinion but where a function resides, doesn't necessarily equate to strong or weak. More how skillfully you wield the function, as it manifests in our behaviour or lack of.

So you're saying that even though my Te is way down on the my (theoretical ENTP) list, it's still possible to wield it skillfully?

 

[rav3n]

So you're saying that even though my Te is way down on the my (theoretical ENTP) list, it's still possible to wield it skillfully?

Consider how "skill" is acquired. It's a combination of practice and natural aptitude. If you consider function stacking, your primary functions are the four you have a preference for and in my opinion, have varying degrees of aptitude towards where it's a downwards sliding scale, the further down the function order you go. Your shadow functions would be functions that you don't have an aptitude for but can use consciously and with practice. When they manifest unconsciously, they're going to manifest in the negative.

But this doesn't change my original premise of wielded skill level, rather than looking at it from the perspective of strength. As an example, Fi is my inferior function. When it manifests, it's crazy strong and is very difficult to control, hence it's still a "strong" function but I don't have the skill to wield it the same way a Fi-dom or aux would.

 

[CuriousFeeling]

Somewhat, thanks! So you're saying that all 5 remaining functions (after your top 3) are shadow functions?

Or are you saying something more like what INTP wrote below?

Yes, they are shadow functions, and what INTP wrote further explains that they are used unconsciously.

 

[INTP]

OK, so are you saying that as an ENTP I use Ne, Ti, Fe, and Si consciously? And I use Ni, Te, Fi, and Se subconsciously and linked to one of my first four functions?

Is there any particular logic to which of my differentiated functions the undifferentiated ones would normally be linked to?

You use 4 functions, N T F S. N is oriented extraverted, T is oriented introverted, F is oriented extraverted and S is oriented introverted. orientation of these functions doesent change, so you dont use Ni Te Fi Se.

Neither can you use all of these functions consciously, unless you differentiate all of them, but i kinda doubt its possible to fully differentiate all functions.

To which of the functions the(for example) undifferianted Fe links to depends on what other function you use the same time.

extraversion means pretty much applying whats inside tosomething outside(directed towards external world). introversion is basically taking whats outside and taking out what you think is irrelevant, this way creating an subjective view to it. (do note that the adding or taking out parts are always unconscious and its the end product of these that can come conscious)

now if we look at the 4 functions;
S = what is
N = where did it come from and where is it(or might be) going
T = what is it that is
F = what is it worth

now whwn it comes to introversion(abstraction/removing) and extraversion(empathy/adding), its the function that determines sort of like what principle to use for adding. you could think it as T=principle of logic, F=principle of value, S=principle of fact and N=principle of possibility.

Now with undifferentiated F for example, you would add worth to things and not be aware that the value judgment of something in external world came from within and is onl





Fuck this shit i hate writing on phone with this idiot dolphin browser, cant get the text in right place


y subjective(even tho you might rationalize it to be logical) and may not be the actual value of it once you understand it better. also this sort of unconscious value judgents that you placed onto external world might have an effect on your Ti. you could think it as sort of unconscious attention focus for your Ti. You just feel(or get unconscious urge) that this is what you need to analyze and you end up analyzing something that your unconscious told you to. A

 

[Noon]

Fuck this shit i hate writing on phone with this idiot dolphin browser, cant get the text in right place

lol. This is probably my favorite post of yours.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

The types are archetypes... Humans rarely achieve such a status. Jung said this was the ideal, the logical progression. humans went ".... No."

 

[INTP]

The types are archetypes...

no.

archetype = inherited parts of the psyche(mind and body). structuring patterns pf psychological performance linked to instinct and is a hypothetical entity. they are irresentable in itself and only evident through its manifestations. is an symbol producing structure(cba to explain what this means). structures within collective unconscious(which is common for all minkind).

archetypes has nothing to do with your type.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

the original pattern or model from which all things of the same kind are copied or on which they are based; a model or first form; prototype.

[MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION]. Sounds like what we're using to derive our thoughts from, no?

 

[INTP]

[MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION]. Sounds like what we're using to derive our thoughts from, no?

no, we dont derive our thoughts from archetype, but an archetype has an effect to our cognition when summoned.

cognition is one of the 5 core functions of the ego, other function of the ego are; stability of personality, stability of identity, reality testing and executive functioning.

personal unconscious has memories, dreams etc. that form complexes(feeling toned associations around a common theme, common theme could be money for example and there are feeling toned associations around money, together this forms a money complex, or complex could be some person as well or anything you have feeling toned associations around). when we devire an complex from our personal unconscious it has an effect to ego(mainly cognition part of it).

collective unconscious has archetypes. when we derive an archetype from collective unconscious, it has an effect on the complexes in personal unconscious, it adds to the complex and this modified complex has different effect to the ego than it would normally have without the modification from archetype. this is how archetype modifying a complex is how archetypal complex is created, for example some person complex could be modified by anima. but the deal is that when a person complex is affected by an archetype(anima for example) you are projecting the archetype onto her and anima blurs your perception about the person. and what you dont realize is that this anima you place onto her, actually comes from inside your Self and the person isnt actually the anima, but the anima is in you. and the anima in you just wants to get on surface, but because it cant be perceived by the ego, it is projected onto a person who seems to fit it. and you need to remember that projections work best on empty screen, this is why the anima usually comes in the form of love at first sight, because its easier to project loads of stuff to a person you dont already know.

archetypes arent something that has an effect on you all the time, but are like complexes, they are there just waiting for conditions to pop onto surface(or archetype pop onto complex and complex onto consciousness).

if you think of shadow for example, there are two different shadows, archetypal and personal. nazi germany could be seen as a manifestation of archetypal shadow, but it needed people to go into theyr personal shadow first. it started so that people were pretty much forced to discriminate jews, if you sold food to a jew in your store, no one bought food from you and your job might had been wrecked because you were seen as jew lover. so in order to survive in your own community, you had to treat outsiders badly, even if you didnt really want to treat jews badly, but you had to survive, so you had to stop selling food for jews. now when this became the norm for people who wouldnt had done it normally, they were in their personal shadow. and once this became the norm, hitler only had to tell people to kill all jews and people followed as there was just one little step to take from current situation, so they slipped into collective shadow. if you think personal shadow as your alter ego that opposes what your ego sees as accepted you. and collective shadow as something that opposes what all human kind sees as a virtue. so its the collective shadow that has an effect on your personal shadow, which has an effect to your consciousness.

if you think about the symbol that the archetype creates, lets say anima = <3, then take a complex, lets say a person called Maria. and then if this Maria <3 is perceived by your ego, you act differently than if you just saw maria and not the anima.

 

[OrangeAppled]

There are several different cognitive process models out there which build on Jung's work. You might want to take a look at some of those (Beebe, Berens & Thompson are the most well-known).

To Jung, if you prefer Ne, then you use T, F & S in a lesser degree. He oriented the inferior function as opposite, so a Ne-dom has Si as their inferior. He implied the auxiliary was oriented opposite also & that it's opposite in its function (ie. if you're a P-dom, then your aux is a judging/rational function). However, he didn't clarify the tertiary. Some interpret him as implying that all the other functions are oriented opposite to the dominant though. Myers theorized differently, that the tertiary would be the same as the dominant, and this is the more popular interpretation, likely because it creates symmetry which seems logical to people (if Ti-Fe are opposites in the dom-inferior, then why are they not opposites in the aux-tert? Thomson's lasagna stacking explains this idea rather neatly by inserting the "shadow functions" between the dom-aux & tert-inferior, truly making the aux-tert "opposites").

So an ENTP, according to this model, is Ne-Ti-F-Si. "Feeling" is not clearly I/E, unless you subscribe to Meyer's model or those who say Jung implied the tertiary is oriented opposite the dominant.

Some 8 function models often use a "shadow" explanation to describe how your 4 functions can appear in the reverse orientation, often in a negative manner. This seems similar to me when people talk about two functions mimicking another (ie. Ne+Ti mimics Ni). It's a reflection of these functions in a distorted form, so that they appear as another function, but an inferior replication of it; just as a shadow is often a distortion of an object, sometimes even appearing as something else (think shadow puppets! ).

However you want to explain it, behaviors, skills & even viewpoints associated with a function can be present in an individual who supposedly does not prefer that function to any significant degree. Maybe it is an unconscious shadow manifestation, maybe it's a mimic, etc, but ultimately it seems a matter of semantics, IMO. I now wonder if Dario Nardi's book discusses whether people NEVER use certain thinking styles that are found in others....

 

[highlander]

I now wonder if Dario Nardi's book discusses whether people NEVER use certain thinking styles that are found in others....

If you mean 8 Keys to Self Leadership, Nardi seems to believe that we use all 8. We develop the lead two by age 15. Between 15 and 30, we develop usage of the top 3 and better synergy with each other. By 50, we have more full development of the third and fourth, with a fifth coming into play. After that, we may further develop the others and integration of up to 8. He also seems to be big on tandem processes and how they can be effectively used together - though they may not be. So, like for Fi - the tandem is Te. You can also have basic and advanced usage of a process. As you said, Lenore Thompson also thinks we use all 8.

At least, that is how I understand it.

 

[redcheerio]

[MENTION=8888]CuriousFeeling[/MENTION] [MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION] [MENTION=10808]Jenaphor[/MENTION] [MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION] [MENTION=8936]highlander[/MENTION]

Thanks for all the thoughtful responses, everyone, I really appreciate it! That does help a lot.

So now what I'd really like to get at is linking the theory of functions to how we actually use them in real life.

Maybe a good one to start with would be Te. To me it seems like anyone who works in an office or does anything business-related, is forced to develop and use Te. I don't think you can even function in an office without it.

As an ENTP, Te does not show up on the list of my first 4, but I'm pretty sure I do use it and it wears me out because it isn't my strength and some of it I find very tedious. However, I think I like some aspects of it, and am actually pretty good at some of it.

http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/extravertedthinking.html

Contingency planning, scheduling, and quantifying utilize the process of extraverted Thinking. Extraverted Thinking helps us organize our environment and ideas through charts, tables, graphs, flow charts, outlines, and so on. At its most sophisticated, this process is about organizing and monitoring people and things to work efficiently and productively. Empirical thinking is at the core of extraverted Thinking when we challenge someone’s ideas based on the logic of the facts in front of us or lay out reasonable explanations for decisions or conclusions made, often trying to establish order in someone else’s thought process. In written or verbal communication, extraverted Thinking helps us easily follow someone else’s logic, sequence, or organization. It also helps us notice when something is missing, like when someone says he or she is going to talk about four topics and talks about only three. In general, it allows us to compartmentalize many aspects of our lives so we can do what is necessary to accomplish our objectives.

So if I do a lot of this already, does that mean that I have in fact developed a good amount of Te, or does it mean that I'm using it subconsciously together with one of my better developed functions, or maybe together with Ne-Ti to make Ne-Ti-Te?

I'd be interested in more of your thoughts, thanks....

 

[INTP]

the list of what Te does that you posted, isnt Te. its just generalizations about what Te people are naturally good at. when it comes to MBTI profiles, its essentially the same thing. this is why people might see that they fit partly to some other types profile, or in this case you to profile of Te.

this planning thing thats listed there can be accomplished by using Ne + Ti also. scheduling can be accomplished by applying info to the framework of Si, or simply using a calendar. etc etc

those stereotypical MBTI profiles or function generalizations are made to simplify an idea. functions actually go much deeper than that sort of superficial things like planning.

you should think functions in these terms:

S: tells you what is. this way just concentrating on details and facts that can be perceived. could be seen as principle of reality.

N: tells you where did it come from and where it is(or might be) going. processed unconsciously, but the answer coming to consciousness. this way it creates big picture perception and is perception from unconscious. also creating what if's this way. principle of possibility.

T: tells you what it is. by creating logical analysis. principle of logic.

F: tells you what is it worth/is it worth it or not. by comparing your emotional reactions to it unconsciously, and wether its worth it or not is perceived. principle of value(of something, not to be confused with personal value system, this is about worth).

when it comes to E and I orientation of functions:
E: extraverted movement of libido. and what this means is that you place(add) a meaning onto external object from inside by some of the four principles(functions). its about animating the object with whats inside. thus libido moves from inside to outside, moves extraverted. jung calls this empathy, as you can see his definition of empathy is bit different from general definition, but the general definition works pretty much the same way.

I: introverted movement of libido. introversion devaluates the object, removes what is seen as irrelevant in external world, using one of the four principles(functions). thus libido moves from outside to inside.

you can see this happening in neurological level if you look at the pathways to occipital lobe(area that processes what is seen, what it means that you see etc. aka visual perception processing). extraversion is moving from other areas(that remove irrelevant info) to occipital lobe.

with introversion information moves from occipital lobe to other areas and goes there almost directly from eyes and other areas dont let unneccesary info enter through other areas before going to consciousness.

now the tricky part about this is how the two extraverted functions interact with the two introverted function. its like a loop that you can travel two ways(E and I) on brains both ending on one point and both of these directions in the loops modifies it. I modifies the loop based on what is irrelevant on perception made by occipital lobe. think it as occipital lobe(located back of the brain) sending impulse of everything perceived towards other areas and towards frontal areas of brains. not all of these impulses get through as neurons need strong enough impulse to continue the course of the impulse further. so some of the impulses are blocked, this the irrelevant stuff on perception. impulses that get through to frontal areas is what you create the subjective perspective from.
extraversion is on the other hand sending impulses from frontal areas and what gets trough(of all neurons in the way) to occipital lobe is what modifies your perception.

if you think about this movement of libido thing, external world is the occipital lobe and internal world on frontal areas. impulses sent on neurons is the libido. so introverted movement of libido is info coming from occipital lobe to other areas and extraverted movement of libido is going towards occipital lobe from other areas.

i dont have time to write more atm, so ill continue later.

 

[redcheerio]

the list of what Te does that you posted, isnt Te. its just generalizations about what Te people are naturally good at. when it comes to MBTI profiles, its essentially the same thing. this is why people might see that they fit partly to some other types profile, or in this case you to profile of Te.

this planning thing thats listed there can be accomplished by using Ne + Ti also. scheduling can be accomplished by applying info to the framework of Si, or simply using a calendar. etc etc

those stereotypical MBTI profiles or function generalizations are made to simplify an idea. functions actually go much deeper than that sort of superficial things like planning.

you should think functions in these terms:

S: tells you what is. this way just concentrating on details and facts that can be perceived. could be seen as principle of reality.

N: tells you where did it come from and where it is(or might be) going. processed unconsciously, but the answer coming to consciousness. this way it creates big picture perception and is perception from unconscious. also creating what if's this way. principle of possibility.

T: tells you what it is. by creating logical analysis. principle of logic.

F: tells you what is it worth/is it worth it or not. by comparing your emotional reactions to it unconsciously, and wether its worth it or not is perceived. principle of value(of something, not to be confused with personal value system, this is about worth).

Great, thanks for the thorough explanation!

The part about those being descriptions of what that function is naturally good at instead of being what those functions actually do, is different than what I previously thought, so maybe that clears things up.

However, if NeTi can do the same things that Te does, and if that is how I do it, then what would be the point of developing my Te later in life?

And how can you tell whether you are actually developing a function (like Te), or just using your natural functions (NeTi) to do the same things (that Te does)? What's the difference?

Also, what do the rest of you think?